Just wondering, because I was looking to buy A.I. for a research presentation, and it had these two versions. The only difference I saw was that the screen ratios were 4:3 and 16:9, but aren't they the same ratio? If someone could explain the difference in terms of how it looks visually on the screen, or make a suggestion to which one to get, lmk! Thanks in advance!
Difference b/w Pan&Scan and Widescreen?
- Thread starter ChinamanatNCSU
- Start date
No, 4:3 & 16:9 are not the same ratio.
4x4 = 16
3 x4 != 9
16:9 = shaped like a movie screen
4:3 shaped like your normal TV/monitor
The 16:9 edition is the original aspect ratio, the 4:3 has been modified to fit your screen.
Viper GTS
4x4 = 16
3 x4 != 9
16:9 = shaped like a movie screen
4:3 shaped like your normal TV/monitor
The 16:9 edition is the original aspect ratio, the 4:3 has been modified to fit your screen.
Viper GTS
4:3 = standard TV
16:9 = widescreen (movie style)
They aren't the same aspect ratio: 4:3 x 3 = 12:9, not 16:9.
Wow, not only beaten once, but twice
16:9 = widescreen (movie style)
They aren't the same aspect ratio: 4:3 x 3 = 12:9, not 16:9.
Wow, not only beaten once, but twice
<< the 4:3 has been modified to fit your screen. >>
This is something I've always wondered about. Just how the hell do they know what size screen I have?
Russ, NCNE
<< This is something I've always wondered about. Just how the hell do they know what size screen I have?
Russ, NCNE >>
When you watch a full screen video, they assume all of you old geezers still use a 4:3 TV. How's that WEGA doing?
<<
<< the 4:3 has been modified to fit your screen. >>
This is something I've always wondered about. Just how the hell do they know what size screen I have?
Russ, NCNE >>
You're joking, right?
[EDIT]Russ has a Wega? He's moving up in the world![/EDIT]
Viper GTS
oh whoops...duh, I can't seem to do simple math anymore...
so widescreen is the format of choice?
so widescreen is the format of choice?
<< oh whoops...duh, I can't seem to do simple math anymore...
so widescreen is the format of choice? >>
Yes, widescreen is what you want.
4:3 you lose roughly 1/3 of the original frame due to chopping the sides.
Viper GTS
<< oh whoops...duh, I can't seem to do simple math anymore...
so widescreen is the format of choice? >>
Yes, otherwise you get a cropped version (loss of picture) of the film.
Widescreen.org
Most movies are filmed in a 1.85:1 or 2.35:1 ratio (meaning the length is 1.85 or 2.35 times the height of the film). Movie theatre screens are in that same format, either 1.85:1 or 2.35:1. Your (assuming you don't have an HDTV Widescreen) TV is in a 4:3 ratio, or 1.33:1, meaning that the length of your TV is only 1.33 times the height. That is why a theatre screen looks considerably wider and "thinner" than your TV.
So say you want to watch a movie on your TV that is filmed in 2.35:1 ratio. Well, something has to be done -- because if you simply stretched the picture height-wise to make it fit your TV, everything would look elongated. So the width of the picture is made to be the width of your TV screen and whatever is not used height-wise is replaced with black bars, hence the term widescreen. Contrary to popular belief you are NOT "losing" the top and/or bottom of the picture, you are seeing the complete picture top to bottom. In fact, you are seeing MORE of the picture from left to right, because in PAN AND SCAN mode you only see ~70% of the actual left-to-right frame.
Most movies are filmed in a 1.85:1 or 2.35:1 ratio (meaning the length is 1.85 or 2.35 times the height of the film). Movie theatre screens are in that same format, either 1.85:1 or 2.35:1. Your (assuming you don't have an HDTV Widescreen) TV is in a 4:3 ratio, or 1.33:1, meaning that the length of your TV is only 1.33 times the height. That is why a theatre screen looks considerably wider and "thinner" than your TV.
So say you want to watch a movie on your TV that is filmed in 2.35:1 ratio. Well, something has to be done -- because if you simply stretched the picture height-wise to make it fit your TV, everything would look elongated. So the width of the picture is made to be the width of your TV screen and whatever is not used height-wise is replaced with black bars, hence the term widescreen. Contrary to popular belief you are NOT "losing" the top and/or bottom of the picture, you are seeing the complete picture top to bottom. In fact, you are seeing MORE of the picture from left to right, because in PAN AND SCAN mode you only see ~70% of the actual left-to-right frame.
<< Viper,
No, I don't have a Wega. They are too small.
Russ, NCNE >>
Last I heard you were watching DVD's on a 19" with RF input. So don't give me any crap about my 27" Wega using component.
What'd you end up getting?
Viper GTS
John,
That's not the "Wega" everybody raves about. The tube versions don't come larger then 40".
Russ, NCNE
That's not the "Wega" everybody raves about. The tube versions don't come larger then 40".
Russ, NCNE
<< That's not the "Wega" everybody raves about. The tube versions don't come larger then 40".
Russ, NCNE >>
Agreed, I wish they wouldn't use the Wega badge on non tube TV's.
There are, however, some beautiful 16:9 Wega tubes.
RP?
:Q:disgust::Q
Viper GTS
I used to be against RPTV's until I went shopping last Christmas and saw the 16:9 HDTV's. When I came across the Hitachi 53" 16:9 HDTV I fell in love. Sure, some non HD channels on DirecTV look grainy and out of focus, but I tend to watch mainly HBO HD, HDNet, and DVD's. I set 10' from the TV and it's as good, if not better, as the local Tinsletown.
<< I used to be against RPTV's until I went shopping last Christmas and saw the 16:9 HDTV's. When I came across the Hitachi 53" 16:9 HDTV I fell in love. Sure, some non HD channels on DirecTV look grainy and out of focus, but I tend to watch mainly HBO HD, HDNet, and DVD's. I set 10' from the TV and it's as good, if not better, as the local Tinsletown.
>>That I could definitely live with, I don't watch TV at all. Just DVD's.
Viper GTS
Viper,
If you want a TV larger then 40", there is no choice besides RP - and the 40" Wega cost more then double what I paid for my 43". Doesn't make a lot of sense for a very minor degree of difference in picture quality, AND a smaller screen.
Russ, NCNE
If you want a TV larger then 40", there is no choice besides RP - and the 40" Wega cost more then double what I paid for my 43". Doesn't make a lot of sense for a very minor degree of difference in picture quality, AND a smaller screen.
Russ, NCNE
<< Viper,
If you want a TV larger then 40", there is no choice besides RP - and the 40" Wega cost more then double what I paid for my 43". Doesn't make a lot of sense for a very minor degree of difference in picture quality, AND a smaller screen.
Russ, NCNE >>
True... Unless you have the cash to go plasma. Which I unfortunately don't.
Viper GTS
John,
How are those SVS working out for you?
Sony also just released a 32" and a 42" WEGA Plasma
http://www.sonystyle.com/electronics/ssctypg.jsp?hierc=8623x8633x9521&catid=9521
How are those SVS working out for you?
Sony also just released a 32" and a 42" WEGA Plasma
http://www.sonystyle.com/electronics/ssctypg.jsp?hierc=8623x8633x9521&catid=9521
Some movies are unwatchable in pan&scan form. Just try watching "Ghostbusters" that way. Poor old Ernie Hudson gets cut out of almost every frame!
It is nice that several TV shows are now being shown in a widescreen format (ER, Enterprise, Babylon 5.) This surely will increase in time, so that eventually all new shows will be wide.
It is nice that several TV shows are now being shown in a widescreen format (ER, Enterprise, Babylon 5.) This surely will increase in time, so that eventually all new shows will be wide.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter